On April 2, 2005 the Washington
Post published a news article [1] asserting that Maryland’s ballistic
fingerprinting database was successful in convicting Robert
Garner for the murder of Kelvin Braxton outside of a Popeye’s restaurant in
Prince Georges County on April 23, 2004.The Post quotes PG state’s attorney Glen Ivey saying "It was
powerful evidence. I hope this verdict helps our efforts to have the
[ballistics identification database] continued and expanded."A Maryland
State Police report dated September 2004, six months prior to Mr. Ivey's
statement, concludes "The Program simply has not met expectations and does
not aid in the Mission statement of the Department of State Police."

The conviction of Robert Garner
and Mr. Ivey's statement came at just the right moment for stalling an
attempt by the Maryland Legislature to kill the program which collects
shell casings from new handguns sold in Maryland.Maryland’s program uses the Integrated Ballistics Identification
System (IBIS) to image a shell casing from each new handgun sold in Maryland
and IBIS is also used for automated searching of a data base of the stored
images to match shell casings left at a crime scene.It was imagined that such matches would provide investigative
leads for police to find criminals.

Many reports (in addition to the
one from the Maryland State Police) indicate that IBIS doesn’t work, so the Ivey
assertion came as a surprise and prompted an effort to confirm his assertion
about the usefulness of IBIS or the stored ballistic fingerprint to this case.
This usefulness should be
evident from the court transcripts [3] of the Garner trial.

The Garner trial transcripts make
clear that IBIS played no role at all in solving this case or in convicting Garner
of murdering Kelvin Braxton.It’s not
even a close call.Police testified that
IBIS was not used – rather only manual ballistic examinations were given in
evidence!Dates play a important
role in understanding what happened and a timeline of events is given here.

Trial testimony [3] reveals that
witnesses observed the license of the shooter’s car as it left the scene.One witness wrote the license down to make
sure it would be remembered and gave the license to the police.The car was traced to Themitha Garner who is
Robert Garner’s sister.The sister
testified [3] that she had lent the car to her brother, but asserted that it
was stolen the day of the shooting and that she had gone to the police the next
day to file a report of the theft.This
theft was refuted by testimony [3] by Garner’s female companion (identified
in news article [2] as Kila Robinson) that Garner was driving his car the
particular day of the shooting, that Garner was at the location of the shooting
at the time of the shooting, that Garner had a handgun she saw in his waistband
and that Garner made an incriminating utterance when driving away from Popeye’s
(and another in a phone conversation with her some time after the shooting).

The testimony [3] reveals that
witnesses identified Garner’s photograph as being the shooter from an array of
photographs prepared by police in their investigation.
And these witnesses didn’t just get a
fleeting glance at the shooter; they observed him in line for chicken at the
restaurant for several minutes and again during the shooting
event.One even testified that
she observed Garner because he was attractive.

So, the license plate on the
shooter’s car leads to Garner’s sister, investigations lead to Garner and
photos are presented to witnesses and they identify Garner as the shooter.Garner is arrested on May 7, 2004.

From this point, this narrative
will present events chronologically according to dates given in trial
testimony.To understand the
significance of some of these dates and events, it is important to know that
evidence technicians collect evidence under the supervision of the detectives
and it is the firearms examination unit which has the expertise and the job to
examine and evaluate firearms related evidence.

4/30/2004 JoShaun Smith
identifies photo of Garner in array as resembling the shooter.

5/3/2004 Barbara
McRae-Hunter identifies Garner as shooter from photo array according to lead
detective Richardson.

5/5/2004 Warrant issued to
search Themitha Garner's residence for “Clothing, shell casings, shells, . . .”
(transcript of testimony by Detective Richardson has the date as 5/5/2005 which
is after the trial, so I believe he meant 5/5/2004 and just misspoke or the date
was transcribed in error by the trial clerk).

5/6/2004 Statement of
Charges issued against Garner for murder of Braxton.

5/7/2004 Garner arrested
and charged with the murder of Braxton and graduates with associates degree.

Torin Zachary Suber, Firearms
Examiner for the Maryland State Police, compares the shell casing of gun
purchased by Michele Anderson stored by MSP with the Braxton murder case
evidence shell casings – more specifically only one of the evidence
casings – manually using a comparison microscope and concludes the evidence
casing and MSP stored casing are from the same gun.

3/28/2005 Garner trial
begins and testimony is given by Garner's female companion, Kila Robertson,
for the day of the murder implicating him and that testimony is made public
by The Examiner [2].

4/1/2005 Garner trial ends
with guilty verdict.

4/2/2005 Washington Post
article is published with Ivey’s claim about ballistic fingerprinting.

The testimony [3] and the
chronology flowing from it make a few points evident.MSP firearms examiner Suber testified that the MSP stored shell
casing of the firearm purchased by Michele Anderson (Garner’s soon to be wife)
was matched to the crime shell casings 5 months after the shooting and 4½
months after Garner is arrested.That
is, conventional police work had already led to Garner as the shooter – not
IBIS.Suber testified using
conventional manual ballistic comparisons of evidence casings to the MSP stored
gun-sale casing using manual observation from a comparison microscope.Trial testimony reveals that IBIS was not
used and the PG lead detective requested a comparison to the casing stored from
the specific gun tied to Michele Anderson which was performed manually.

In the trial, Michele Anderson
Garner used a spousal immunity to refuse to testify [3].Since she married Garner while he was
in custody on 12/5/04 and the gun she owned had been “traced” to the crime
scene, you’d think that this marriage might not have been allowed.It really doesn’t take a lot of cleverness
to imagine that she might have some useful testimony to offer.But the state let her gain a spousal
immunity by permitting her marry Garner.

Ivey makes the point that the
stored shell casing from the purchased gun was important to the state’s case
against Garner.So, one might argue
that taking cases and storing them would be occasionally useful to police even
if IBIS didn’t work for closing the loop on stupid criminals like Garner – that
is, when a criminal uses a gun that can be traced to him by a conventional police
ballistics investigation.However, that
didn't happen in this case since there was never any testimony placing the
specific gun bought by Michele Anderson in Robert Garner's hands.

It is a matter of opinion whether
a conviction might have been obtained without the shell casing evidence, but,
to accept the jury would find Garner not guilty without ballistic
evidence, you’d have to 1) think the firm identification of witness Barbara
McRae-Hunter and the resembling identification by witness JoShaun Smith not
convincing; 2) think it wasn’t Garner driving his sister’s car (because it was
stolen) or that witness Cynthia Hedgepeth at the shooting made an error in
noting the license of the car as the shooter drove away; 3) believe that the
witness Kila Robertson, who actually had tattoos and hair coloring like the
woman described by witnesses as accompanying the shooter, was lying by
testifying that she was the female companion of Garner for the day of the
shooting and had gone to Popeye’s in Garner’s car with Garner, had
seen a gun in Garner's waistband, and had heard an incriminating utterance
made when driving away from Popeye’s; 4) believe that Garner sister’s car
was really stolen and that the thief resembled Garner well enough to
confuse witnesses and the female companion Kila Robertson.

There will always some people who would rather believe
that Garner’s guilty verdict depended on testimony that a gun was traced to the
crime but not to Garner since the state offered no testimony placing that gun
in Garner’s hands.These people would
rather believe that this gun tracing, which involves a shell casing with a
nebulous chain of custody (the state stored casing was collected by a commercial
company, sent to a NY firm, forwarded to REALCO in Maryland, sold by REALCO
which then forwarded the shell casing to the MSP) was convincing whereas the
other evidence would not be. And these people would rather believe that, despite
the lack of testimony to place the gun in Garner's hands (the closest they got
was a trace to a woman who married Garner in jail after the crime).

Perhaps the state is so
incompetent that it cannot win murder cases even with eyewitnesses to the
events including a personal friend of the defendant.If so, our public safety is in serious trouble, but that appears
to be state’s attorney Ivey’s assertion.It is a remarkable confession by Mr. Ivey to a lack of confidence in the
competence of a department he leads.

Appendix. Summary Notes of Trial Testimony

These notes were recorded from testimony at the trial.Links to the actual testimony are given in
reference of the main article [3].

21MR. MOOMAU:May it please the Court, good

22afternoon.My name is William Moomau.I'm
an assistant

23State's Attorney here for Prince George's
County.I'll

24be representing the State of Maryland
throughout this

25trial.

1-111

1On April 23, 2004, in front
of a crowded

2Popeye's restaurant at approximately 7:55 located at

36247 Livingston Road in Oxon Hill, Prince
George's

4County, Maryland, Kelvin Braxton was shot
and killed.

5He was 22 years of age at the time.He wasn't just shot

6and killed, he was put to death.Because the evidence

7is going to show that, the autopsy report
shows, he was

8shot eleven times.The last time, in the back of the

9head to end his life, to make him go away.

10See, on that day, the 23rd, Kelvin
had been at

11his mother's house where she lived.Mia Braxton.And

12his mother was getting ready to move, and
Kelvin was

13there helping her move.He was there with a friend of

14his, Ricardo Shannon Scriber.Sometime after 7:00 they

15decided to go get something to eat.Kelvin wanted to

16get Ricardo something to eat at
Popeye's.It was close

17by.They go there.They go there in
Mr. Scriber's car.

18They park in front.They go inside.They're waiting in

19the line inside.

20Kelvin turns, sees the
Defendant.The

21Defendant is with a female.She's noticed because she

22has a lot of tattoos on her.And I don't know, I don't

23mean any disrespect to her, but she was a
bigger woman.

24She had red streaks in her hair, and her
hair was red.

25People noticed her.They noticed him.At some point,

1-112

1Kelvin and Ricardo Scriber, they get the
food, and they

2go over to the drinks, the drink station.Then they go

3out.

4Before that, the Defendant had
gone outside.

5He's waiting there.There's words exchanged.In fact,

6there were some words exchanged
inside.The evidence

7will show that Kelvin Braxton approached
the Defendant.

8Tried to greet him.The Defendant ignored him.Kelvin

9Braxton didn't like that.And he said some

10disrespectful words to the Defendant.Some unkind

11words.Some curse words.And that's
what this is over.

12They went outside.They had words.Kelvin

13Braxton got in the passenger side seat of
the car.

14Ricardo Scriber was in the driver's
seat.The next

15thing everyone knew, shots being
fired.One, two,

16three, four, five, six.Numerous.Through the

17passenger side window.Hitting Kelvin Braxton.He gets

18out.He opens the door.Now, there's
-- say, I'm

19sitting in the passenger seat.There's a car beside

20him.Their car was facing the Popeye's.He opens the

21door.He stumbles out.He runs to the
back of the car.

22He doesn't expect the Defendant to be there
waiting for

23him.He had come around the other side of the other car

24to shoot some more times, finishes him off,
shooting him

25in the back of the head.

1-113

1As you can imagine when this
happens, there's

2pandemonium.People were screaming, crying, running.

3Calls are made to 9-1-1.Patrol officers arrive on the

4scene.They tried to secure the area, tried to calm

5everybody down.Evidence technicians arrive.Homicide

6Detectives arrive.The lead Detective in the case is

7Detective Charles Richardson.He gets the video from

8the store.He had to have it enhanced by the Secret

9Service because the video doesn't show --
it shows the

10victim going to the drink station, and Ricardo Scriber

11who was with him.It doesn't show the Defendant or the

12girl that he was with because they were out
of the field

13of view.That was one video camera.

14There was another video camera
that is showing

15the door.And my interpretation of it is that the lens

16was so covered with grease it's like
looking, if you've

17ever been swimming in a river under water
without any

18goggles on, that's what it looks like.You can just see

19shadows of people.So, that video may help some, but

20you're not going to be able to pick anyone
out in that

21one.And the first one isn't --
the quality is not that

22good.

23Shell casings are found at the
scene.Ten

24shell casings, .40 caliber, Federal
brand.There are

25some bullets found at the scene, bullet
jackets,

1-114

1fragments in the car, underneath the
victim, on the

2parking lot.They're analyzed and looked at and it's

3determined that all ten of the shell casings that were

4found were fired from the same gun.The bullets that

5were recovered from the victim's body, as
well as the

6bullet fragments there in the parking lot
underneath the

7victim, in the car, they're consistent with
the shell

8casings that were found at the scene.

9The cars there are
fingerprinted.Robert

10Taylor is the evidence technician.He was able to lift

11some prints.They were examined.The
prints came back

12to the victim, Kelvin Braxton.Detective Richardson

13starts pursuing leads.He wants to find out who did

14this
terrible thing.At some point the
Defendant is

15developed as a suspect.

16Now, part of that is someone --
some people at

17the Popeye's got a license plate number of
the car that

18drove away.See, the Defendant was there in a car.A

19teal colored Mazda.And when it was driving away, the

20license plate number BKV 310 was written
down.Comes

21back to his sister, Themitha Garner.A Mazda.

22Through his investigation, the
Defendant is

23developed as a suspect.There's some photo spreads that

24are put together.Some people that were there at the

25Popeye's, and you'll hear their names,
JoShaun Smith,

1-115

1Barbara McRae-Hunter, Cynthia Hedgepeth,
Leonard Davis.

2They all gave statements.They were all interviewed

3that day -- or that evening, or night.

4I'll tell you now, Cynthia
Hedgepeth gave a

5written statement, and in her statement she
mentioned

6the terrible shooting that had taken place,
and she gave

7the license plate number.At
some point later, through

8an interview, she discloses that she
thought she saw a

9gun in the hand of the victim when he
exited the vehicle

10after the Defendant had fired the first
rally of bullets

11into the car.But no gun was found at the scene.And

12no shell casings from any other gun were
found at the

13scene.

14Photo spreads are developed.They're shown to

15JoShaun Smith by Detective Richardson.He picks out a

16photograph of the Defendant.Now, it's not a positive

17identification.He "resembles" that person.He shows a

18photo -- Detective Richardson shows a photo
spread to

19Barbara McRae-Hunter.You will see them.There's a

20group of photos that look like high school
graduation-

21type pictures and another group of photos
that are black

22and white type pictures, and she picks out the

23Defendant.And the reason she picked out the Defendant

24is that she admired his looks.She was looking at him

25there, especially with the lady that he was
there with.

1-116

1She was thinking, you know, "What's he
doing there with

2her?"And we'll get to who she was.

3Based on that information,
Detective Richardson

4obtains an arrest warrant.But that's not it.Because

5Detective Richardson finds out about a
girlfriend of the

6Defendant.Michele Anderson.Finds out that
she had

7purchased a handgun.A .40
caliber Taurus, serial

8number SVH60174.She had purchased it on March 27th of

92004, at a store by the name of
REALCO.And what this

10brings into play, and you'll hear testimony
dealing with

11this, whenever a firearm, a handgun is sold
in the State

12of Maryland, included in the box with the
handgun from

13the manufacturer is a shell casing fired
from that gun

14at the manufacturer.When that handgun is sold, that

15shell casing is sent up to the State Police
in

16Reisterstown.It's put in their database there.

17So, with the information Detective
Richardson

18had that a gun, a handgun, had been sold to the

19Defendant's girlfriend, Michele Anderson,
he takes the

20shell casings recovered at the scene that
had already

21been analyzed that had been fired from the
same gun, he

22takes them to Reisterstown.He meets with a Firearms

23Technician there, Zach Suber, of the
Maryland State

24Police.He picks out one of the casings that Detective

25Richardson had brought, and had already
been analyzed

1-117

1and shown had been fired from the same gun,
and he

2compared it with the shell casing they have
on file

3there, the one fired from the .40 caliber Taurus PT-140,

4serial number SVH60174, sold to the
Defendant's

5girlfriend an March 27, 2004.They were fired from the

6same gun.

7To Detective Richardson, it
doesn't end there,

8because he wants to find out who the girl
was the

9Defendant was there with.And he does.He finds out.

10The girl's name was Kila Robertson.He interviewed her,

11and she's going to testify.She's going to testify

12that, yes, she was at the Popeye's with the
Defendant

13that day.She's known him for awhile.In
fact, lived

14in the same neighborhood.She was there with him.

15She's going to testify.She has tattoos on her, how

16people described her there.She had streaked hair, red.

17She was in there in the Popeye's restaurant
with him on

18a Friday night, and that's when this
happened.She

19remembers because it was what she called
ladies night,

20or girls night out.

21Robert Garner goes outside.She's going out.

22All of a sudden, she starts hearing
shots.She gets in

23the car.She sees him get in the car, sees the handgun

24in his waist.The Defendant says, "He's gone."She

25says, "What happened?What's going on?""He's gone."

1-118

1And that's not all the evidence,
because you

2can't cover it all in opening, but that's
pretty much

3it.It's going to be, like the Judge instructed you,

4you could be here three days.I just ask that you be

5fair, be attentive, and be fair.I'm not going to ask

6you to use your common sense because I
found when

7lawyers ask someone to use their common
sense, they're

8usually talking about using the lawyer's
common sense.

9So, use your own common sense, the sense
that brought

10you here, the sense that you developed
dealing with

11family, children, school, friends, work,
and use that.

12And in evaluating the evidence using that
judgment, just

13be fair.That's what we all ask for.And
I'm confident

14that at the end, in using your judgment,
you will

15conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the
Defendant,

16Robert Garner, is guilty of murdering
Kelvin Braxton.

17And that's a verdict that I will ask that
you return.

18On behalf of the State of Maryland, I want to

19thank you for your service.I look forward to working

20with you throughout this trial.And I'm sure that in

21the
end, your verdict will be a just one.Thank you.

Summary of witness
testimonies:

Mia Braxton (Mother of victim Kevin Braxton). Testifies
about Kevin’s activities helping her move before the shooting and identifying
her son in a videotape from Popeyes where the shooting occurred.

Kila Robinson. In response to the first question as to
whether she knows Robert Garner (the defendant) she pleas the fifth.After being given immunity, she testifies
she knew Garner several years.Then she
testifies as being the tattooed person in state’s evidence photographs; that
she was at Popeyes with Garner on the day of the shooting in the car seen
leaving with the shooter; that Garner drove the car; that it was in the
evening; that she got into the left register line; that she did not appear in
store video; that Garner was in line with her and didn’t leave the line to go
outside; that she didn’t see the shooting; that Garner drove away from the
store; that she saw his firearm in his waistband; that he made a incriminating
utterance; that he made another incriminating utterance in a phone conversation
with her some time after the shooting.

JoShaun Smith. (Special Agent with Dept. of State).Testifies to being at Popeyes on the day of
the shooting at about 6:00pm and about the layout of the restaurant.Testifies as to the beginning of the
altercation between the person killed and the killer.Testifies about the layout around the outside of Popeyes.Testifies about the shooting which he
witnessed. Testifies about picking the photo of Garner as RESEMBLING the
shooter (not definite).

End of Testimony on 3/28/05

Barbara McRae-Hunter. Describes being at Popeyes; describes
a couple in line 1; describes how the victim tried to talk to the suspect and
the suspect didn’t reply; describes how she picked a picture of the shooter out
of a photo array to identify the picture of the shooter on 5/3/05 [10 days
after the shooting]; describes that she watched the suspect and victim for
about 10 minutes while in line at Popeyes.

Cynthia Hedgepeth. Describes the shooting; seeing the
license of the car that the shooter left in (as a passenger) and that she gave
the license number to the police after the shooting; said she couldn’t identify
the shooter.

PATRICIA ARONICA-POLLAK, M.D. (Maryland Assistant Medical
Examiner).Testifies that Kelvin
Braxton died from 11 gunshot wounds and the details of the wounds; testifies to
body fluid tests; testifies to bullets and other evidence recovered in autopsy;
testifies as to cause of death.

Leonard Davis. (Justice Protective Security Officer for the
Department of Justice).Testifies
seeing the shooter and victims in Popeyes, that the victim held the door when
he entered the resturant; that he saw victim and shooter leave, and then after
first shot, turned to see shooter shooting the victim; testified about shooter
getting companion and leaving in a car; testifies the shooter drove the car on
leaving; testifies about not being able to identify the shooter from photos.

Robert G. Morrison. (Executive Vice President and Chief
Operating Officer of Taurus International Manufacturing, Inc.)Testifies about firearm manufacturing and
testing practice; about shell casing collection procedure for sales to States
of Maryland and New York [appears they have very careful and thorough
procedures]; that the firearm was Model PT-140 with Serial Number SVH60174 and
shipped to NY to RSR Group 21 Trolly Road -- Trolley Circle, in Rochester, New
York

End of 3/29/2005 testimony.

Jermaine Allen. (Prince George's County Police Officer for 3
years) Testified as being first responder on scene and what he did to control
the scene until investigators arrive and to aid investigators in crowd
control.Testified that evidence remained
in same location as he first observed it until investigators arrived.

Michael Brown. (Prince George's County Police Officer for 3
years & Squad VPO – processing officer for squad) Testified as being
officer on the scene after two or three officers but before investigators,
describes efforts to control the scene and to mark location of evidence.Identifies evidence marked by placards by
him from photos of the crime scene. Is vague about when he arrived and left the
scene.

Robert McDaniel.(Prince George's County Police Officer for ? years, Evidence Unit for
the Forensic Services Division).Testifies about transferring evidence from Evidence Unit to the Firearms
Unit; testified that he delivered six bullets, a bullet jacket and a bullet
fragment on May 10, 2004; testified
that he also delivered fired shell casings, or cartridge casings, bullets and
fragments on April 27th.(Exhibits
32 through 45); testified that he did not develop evidence only delivered it.

Brian Grempler. (Evidence Technician with Prince George's
County Police for 4 years). Testifies to being at autopsy of Kelvin Braxton on April 24th, 2004 to collect evidence; that he
collected evidence marked as State's Exhibits 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 17, 18 and 19
which are bullet and bullet fragments; that he took the evidence to the
Evidence Section to be forwarded to be forwarded to the firearms unit.

Michele Garner. (wife of defendant and formerly Michele
Alethea Anderson). Testifies to having married the defendant on Dec. 5, 2004;
invokes her marital privilege to not testify

CHARLES RICHARDSON. (Detective with Prince George's County
Homicide for 8 years and 16 years total with the PG police). Testifies to being
lead detective on this case; testifies about supervising interviews of
witnesses; collecting personal items of the victim including a lottery card,
multiple glassine baggies, court papers, match book, a contractor I.D. card,
$110, D.C. driver's license, a cigarette lighter, keys, 65 cents change, and
then $12; testifies there was nothing in the baggies; testifies about reviewing
surveillance tape from Popeyes and taking the tape to the Secret Service to
enhance the tape.Testifies about
receiving license number for a lead; tracing that number to 1992 Mazda owned by
Themitha Renee Garner and Angella Vernessa Garner; testifies that Themitha
Renee Garner is a sister of defendant; testifies about getting a photo of
defendant and preparing a photo array to show witnesses; testifies showing
JoShaun Smith a yearbook on April 30, 2004 with Robert Garner in the yearbook
and that Smith said that a photo of the defendant resembled the man that
committed the homicide; testifies showing Barbara McRae-Hunter two photographic
arrays on April 24, 2004 and that McRae-Hunter selected a photo of the defendant
as being the man who committed the homicide; testifies showing Leonard Davis
two photographic arrays on April 24, 2004 and that Davis was unable to identify
anyone.

RICHARDSON testifies filing an Application for a Statement
of Charges against the Defendant for the murder of Kelvin Braxton on May 6, 2004, 10:19 am; testifies the Defendant
was arrested for the murder of Kelvin Braxton on May
7, 2004at his sister's (Themitha Garner's) residence and searched
Ms. Garner’s residence using a warrant issued May
5, 2005; testifies coming contact with Michele Anderson who is now
Michele Garner the defendant’s wife; testifies that he had learned Michele
Garner (Anderson) had bought a pistol at REALCO guns. Testifies to going to
Maryland State Police Firearms Lab on Reisterstown, Maryland with the shell
casings from the scene of the Popeye's (Exhibits 44, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37,
36, 35, 32 being shell casings) which he obtained from the property warehouse
on Harwood Road on October 25, 2004;
testifies meeting Zach Suber at the lab and ask for a comparison of the casings
with that of the one on file from the gun purchased by Michele Garner
(Anderson); testifies trying to locate female companion of shooter via cell
phone records and located a witness by the name Kila Robertson; testifies about
how the photo arrays were constructed and that one photo was an arrest photo
from a prior arrest of the defendant; testifies about learning about the owner
of the suspect car the same night as the shooting.

Corporal Robert Taylor, ID 2039. (Prince George's County
Police Evidence Section for 6 years). Testifies about formal training as
evidence technician; that the crime scene at Popeyes was secure when he arrived
at 8:10pm; testifies about the evidence collected including photos of the
evidence; testifies collecting fingerprints of victim off a car; testifies
about recovering shell casings, projectiles and projectile jackets.

Alan Jackson. (Supervisor of the Prince George's County
Police Department Firearm Examination Unit; police officer for twenty years;
supervisor for PG ).Testifies as to
his training and experience as a firearms examiner; when prosecutor moved to
accept Mr. Jackson as an expert, defense asked for voir dire on his expertise
in ballistic fingerprinting – to that the prosecutor responded that ballistic
fingerprinting would be beyond the scope of prosecution testimony; court rules
ballistic fingerprinting is within the expertise of the witness; court accepts
Mr. Jackson as an expert. Testifies as to how he does ballistic comparisons
under microscope; testifies as to the various markings that are made by
firearms on cartridge parts when fired; testifies that on April 27, 2004, he received ten fired
cartridge cases and four fired bullets, bullet jackets and items like that from
the crime scene and on May 10th received eight envelopes containing
fired bullets and bullet fragments submitted to our laboratory; testified that
all bullets and bullet jackets were fired from the same gun; testified that the
measurements from the bullet lands and grooves narrowed the gun used to Astra,
Beretta, Heckler, and Koch, K-o-c-h, Hi-Point, Ruger and Taurus; testifies that
all cartridge cases were fired from the same gun; testifies that after
conducting examination the evidence was sealed and sent to property for
storage.

When the defense asked on cross examination whether the
shell casings and bullets were submitted for comparison to ballistic database,
the prosecution objected that the cross was not within scope of direct examination.That objection was sustained.

Richard Anderson. (Retail sales clerk, REALCO Gun Shop).
Testifies as to the procedures for selling a handgun; testifies being familiar
with Michele Anderson having sold at least two handguns to her at various
times; testifies that he delivered the a Taurus PT-140, serial number SVH60174
.40 caliber gun in question to her on March 27,
2004; testifies about REALCO’s (and his) practice for forwarding the
shell casing to MSP.

Clarence E. Fields. (Laboratory Technician with the Maryland
State Forensic Science Division for 3 years 2 months). Testifies as to
background and training for his ability to perform to maintain ballistic
database for MSP including procedures for adding new shell casings to the
Quetel System database; testifies from reports prepared that the particular
shell casing from the Taurus PT-140, serial number SVH60174 .40 caliber gun was
placed in the MSP database on April 5, 2004;
Testifies that he retrieved the shell casing from storage on October 25, 2004; Testified that there were
50,900 shell casings in the database [as of the day of the testimony 3/30/05 I
guess].

Torin Zachary Suber (Firearms Examinerfor the Maryland State Police for 4 years 3
months).Testifies about functions he
performs as a firearms examiner and about his education and training for his
job; testifies about comparison microscopes (“bread and butter of what we do”)
and their use for shell casing comparison; (become qualified as expert in the
field of firearms examination); testifies as to getting evidence (10 shell
casings) on October 25, 2004 for
comparison to the stored casing and a report from Terry Eaton of PG police
dept.; testified that he concluded from Eaton’s report that all the 10 evidence
casings came from the same gun and that conclusion led him to test compare only
one of the 10 to the stored casing; testifies about using the comparison
microscope to make comparison from one of the 10 evidence casings to the stored
casing from the MSP storage of new gun casings; testifies that in his opinion
the two casings were fired from the same gun; (here several efforts of defense
attorney to get testimony about police use ballistic fingerprint database were
defeated on the basis that no testimony by the prosecutor on direct covered
this material; also efforts to get testimony about the wrong shell casing being
forwarded from the retail sale was defeated for the same reason); testifies
that ballistic markings can change over time, but “it takes a long -- thousands
and thousands of rounds, and, actually, damage, or, actually, if it had been
distorted in some kind of way by a shooter.That's possible.”

When asked about use of the computer, Suber testifies “The
computer does nothing for me.Like I
stated before, I use a comparison microscope, which enables me to bring two
objects together to appear as one.”Continuing Suber testifies:

Q.Are computers
able to give aid to you in your deliberations as to your conclusions?

A.Not at all.The Maryland IBIS system is just an investigative
tool.It enables me to say -- it breaks
it down, per se, as to a list of possibilities.But what this right here, it was all the way done on the
comparison microscope.It's a computer
aid.It's just an investigative tool.
Testifies that this was the first time he had been called to testify concerning
a shell casing from the MSP stored casings from new guns.

Ricardo Scriber. Testifies that he was a friend of the
victim Kelvin Braxton; that he went to Popeyes on the day Braxton was killed;
Testifies about being unable to identify shooter about being unable to remember
shooter’s female companion hair color or special characteristics, about not
overhearing the conversation between the victim and the killer, about not
seeing the killer leave or the car he left in; Denies supplying police with a
written statement (then his written statement is introduced as evidence) to
which he clarifies that his statement wasn’t supplied to police but to a
detective;

End of Testimony on 3/30/05.

A motion on 3/31/05 objected to the evidence concerning the
gun sold by REALCO on the basis that the state didn’t show how a gun sold by
Taurus to Rochester, New York got to REALCO (defect in chain of evidence).Motion was denied.

Beginning of defense:

ERICA COLES.Testifies
to witnessing the shooting while driving into the parking lot at Popeyes and
that the shooter ran off then walked down Livingston Road and didn’t get into a
car in the parking lot; testified that the shooter wore a white teeshirt, jean
shorts and a black skull cap and black tennis shoes; testifies she saw the two
people in the shooting – victim and attacker; testifies it wasn’t the
defendant.

CHARLES RICHARDSON (recalled Detective). Defense asked
Detective concerning numerous witnesses that were unable to identify the
defendant from a photo array or people who weren’t shown an array because they
said they couldn’t identify the shooter. Defense asked Richardson whether other
lines of investigation were pursued and was shut down on most occasions by court.
Richardson testified that there was no evidence from phone records that the
defendant had contact with the victim; no evidence of a prior beef between the
two; Defense tried a series of questions to discredit Richardson for conduct on
other cases such as lying and threatening witnesses – court wouldn’t allow the
questions to be answered; defense tried to discredit Richardson for not being
thorough enough with his investigation to rule out other suspects and
identifies two people calling 9-1-1 on the shooting that were not interviewed.

Clarence L. Parker, Jr. Testifies as to knowing the
defendant about 10 years; that the defendant is a peaceful person of good
character; that he had no knowledge that Garner was ever in trouble with the
law.

Themitha Renee Garner. (sister of defendant).Testifies brother was to graduate on May 7 with associates degree, but was arrested
that day; testifies that brother regularly used her Mazda with license BKV 310.
Testifies she reported the Mazda stolen on the 24th of April, 2004; that she
went to the police station with her brother to make the report; that the police
report contains the date of 23 April in evening that the car was stolen.

Corrine Mallory. Testifies basically that she heard shooting
at Popeyes but was too far from it to see anything significant; testifies
seeing a person leaving the area at a fast pace on foot; testifies about
calling 9-1-1; testifies about not being interviewed by police

The jury returns a guilty verdict 1st degree
murder and violence with a firearm in about 8 hours of deliberation.